[2011] 7 MLJ A B C D E F G H I Public Prosecutor v Muhammad Rasid bin Hashim (Abang Iskandar J) 857 cannot be denied that the evidence of SP3, SP4, SP5, SP6, SP7, SP8, SP9, SP11, SP14, SP17, SP18 and SP19 must be viewed as key in the overall scheme of the whole prosecution’s case. I must hasten to add that this observation is not tantamount to saying that the evidence of the other witnesses are not critical, but rather in comparative terms, the evidence of those witnesses as singled out above would be, what could be termed as being more impactful and therefore, ought to deserve particular mention in the course of this judgment, in so far as it is specifically necessary to refer to and to quote from their evidence verbatim. [14] The evidence of SP3 and SP4 had established as undisputed fact that the deceased had indeed been staying with them for about a week until the day of the incident. The evidence of SP4 specifically also established as a fact that the deceased had, on that fateful day, a set of keys to the apartment, where she said: ‘Setiba saya di luar pintu rumah saya di No 02–04 itu saya nampak pintu2 rumah saya itu dalam keadaan berkunci. Saya dapati mangga Solex berkunci di grille pintu. Pintu grille itu pun berkunci dan pintu kayu pun berkunci. Saya cuba buka pintu itu dengan goncang mereka tetapi tidak dapat. Saya tidak ada kunci pada masa itu kerana kunci pada rumah saya, yang ada 4 anak kunci itu telah saya serah kepada Siti Zawiah pada pagi hari itu sebelum saya pergi kerja. Kami telah berjanji untuk berjumpa di pekan Rawang supaya dia kuncikan rumah selepas keluar dari rumah itu.’ That was the reason why SP4 accepted the invitation of her neighbour to wait for Nur Hanani (SP3) in the former’s apartment after she had failed to get into her apartment that night. [15] When suggested during cross-examination by learned counsel, that other persons too had a set of keys to her apartment besides she and Nur Hanani, SP4 had disagreed, when she said: ‘Saya tidak setuju. Tidak ada orang lain yang punya set kunci kepada rumah saya selain saya dan Nur Hanani (SP3).’ This fact was also adverted to by SP3 when she said in her testimony, thus: ‘Setahu saya, Siti Zawiah ada pegang set kunci pada rumah itu yang Zalina pegang.’ It was also the evidence of SP3 that the deceased had never told her anything about she having a boyfriend and that as far as she could recall, the deceased never invited any man into her apartment during her stay with them. This factual assertion was not challenged by the defence. [16] The evidence by the arresting police officer, chief inspector Nordin Misban (SP6) had shown that, among the items that he had seized from the accused when the latter was arrested in Perak a few days after the accident, actually it was on the 16 March to be exact, had been a set of house keys, which were subsequently identified by SP6 in court and marked as P13(1–4). His evidence on this has been as follows: ‘Semasa tangkapan tersebut, saya telah merampas 4 anak kunci dari poket kanan seluar Muhammad Rasid.’ In answer to cross-examiantion by learned counsel, SP6 had said that: ‘Saya telah rampas